9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa The present appeal is against the impugned order of Commissioner vide which he has confirmed the demand of duty of Service Tax of Rs. 1,05,52,420/- against the appellant for the period 01.06.2007 to 31.03.2012 along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalties under Section 76, 77 and 78 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctivities would fall under works contract activities, raised the demands by invoking the longer period which stands confirmed by the impugned order of Authorities below. 4. The appellants have contended that the activity undertaken by them were not meant for commerce or industry and inasmuch as the same was for the construction of water reservoir which has a basic infrastructure for the distribut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilar allegations made in the present case were also confirmed by the Original Adjudicating Authority, but on appeal Commissioner (Appeals) allowed all the appeals by relying upon various decisions of the Tribunal and set aside the confirmations. The said order in appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) in three cases stand placed on record. 6. Learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue agrees that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
